I recently had the opportunity to visit New York City after three and a half years. The number of new bold architectural jewels that sprout out within this relatively short period is truly staggering. The levelling effect of the grid allows each unique and bold piece to roam free without a care. Here are some impressions:

Despite not not being a Calatrava fan, it is hard not to be impressed with the scale of his oculus downtown working relatively well as it's meant to function as a singular space. Still the ends of the repetitive elements that structure the space is dissapointing. The auxiliary space for access to PATH was a pleasant surprise. The 'wings' disruption of the streets' relentless alignment also adds further interest to the project in my opinion.

The 'wings'

Oculus

PATH

Herzog & de Meuron's new addition to the skyline reveals the clever repetition of its many floors as one gets closer.

56 Leonard

BIG's west 57 is impressive. It boldly breaks the mold within developer projects although the limitations (realities!) within construction quality is visible even to me.

West 57

I liked the new Whitney museum overall. However even though I respect the dialogue with the old one still I wish there was a main staircase inside. The ones outside at the terraces are the best!

New Whitney

Vinoly is insane and somewhat of a sore thumb at the moment in certain views of the skyline. Still there is something appealing within its suspicious proportions.

432 Park Ave

DS+R 's medical building at Columbia university felt like they finally built the eyebeam. Reminiscent of many student projects from that time. Nice scale and details at first glance. I'm personally curious about the GRC facade in time.

Finally Zaha. Despite general criticism of her work the facade of 520 W 28th street under construction looks well built and well resolved under many practical constraints. And it is well seductive. Wish she could see it complete.

Top of the 'walkie talkie' is a privately owned public space for which one needs to book a time slot online and show a photo ID walking through metal detectors on ground floor. Once you're up it feels novel. A very large roof garden covered with glass climbs up via stairs towards the North with 360 degree panaromic views of London. Structure enveloping the space is white painted steel with all the necessary hierarchies executed so cleanly that it makes it look easy ! The central restaurant bit is the most disappointing part.

This year's serpentine pavilion is by the Spanish office Selgas Cano. It's colourful and fun! Seemingly haphazard ETFE fabric blends and transitions a careful selection of colours. Spatial organisation is central and straight forward (boring) other than the multi-layered entry ways. Overall form is unique and doesn't immideatly remind us of anything - it is almost "weird".

In May 2013, protesters fed up with the government’s increasing totalitarian tendencies occupied Gezi Park and TaksimSquare in Istanbul, which abuts one of the main architectural landmarks from 60’s Turkey. Named after the founder of the modern Republic of Turkey, Atatürk Cultural Centre (ACC) holds a 1307 seat main opera hall among five other spaces for art and culture.

Inaugurated in 1969, the ACC is a prominent example of modern, functionalist architecture in Istanbul representing the republic’s founding generation. The building gained its listed status in 2007 upon which plans for its demolition came to a halt. Nevertheless, it’s been shut since 2008 for a chronically underfunded and delayed refurbishment period. The government today still aspires to raze ACC and Gezi Park in order to redevelop the site into a new shopping mall.

During Taksim protests, the westward public facade of ACC was transformed via numerous flags and banners. The crowd wished to at once protect the historic facade as inherited culture, and to amend it into a reflection of their generational identity. However, this attempt had limited success. The singular, monolithic reading of the building’s facade remained. The visual movement and multiplicity captured in the building's bri-soleilpattern could never overcome the singular facade which, to the protesters symbolized the government's unbridled grasp on power. In his seminal essay ‘The Politics of Facade’ Alejandro Zaera-Polo argues, “ The emergence of new political forms runs in parallel to the development of envelopes that resist primitive modes of faciality.” With banners, the protesters demonstrated against the imposed politics of an entrenched government. By doing so, they also demonstrated the evolving architectural challenges of a cultural landmark that can truly reflect a contemporary society.

An attempt to literally represent each fraction of society in a cultural building design would be wrongful and naive. A landmark building could never replace a landmark square. Such pluralistic design approach is bound to undermine the architectural value and yield to an expression no greater than the banners on a facade. Instead, the increasing sense of cultural multiplicity should be acknowledged as a design opportunity and be incorporated as a fundamental parameter. The construction technology no longer requires a clear distinction of the facade from the roof and it has moved beyond the complications of fenestration. We have the opportunity to break down archaic hierarchies, respond to pressing ecological necessities and most importantly, through architectural design, express the dynamic socio-political multiplicities of our generation.

The protests of 2013 in Turkey as well as others from all around the world such as Occupy Wall Street and Tahrir Square showed that Generation Y cannot be categorized under a single roof nor a single facade. Today, the level to which a landmark building design can house and reflect the interpretations of an increasing cultural multiplicity must take place at the bases for decision making on its cultural merit.

Recently, during a short visit to Vienna for the first time, I managed to hit a few architectural landmarks that are of interest to me. Despite being on the opposing sides of the architectural theory in the early 20th century, Adolf Loos and Otto Wagner seem to share a certain sensibility for the built environment, which includes attention to detail and overall coherence whether the weapon of choice was ornament or pure materiality... And there are the contemporary ones.